Dev pulls bad critique from youtube. Too far?

nesf

Lyrical wrote: »

Sorry I probably didn't explain my point well and I thought after I posted it,it might come across as ambiguous.What you said is right and I agree with you.I was just trying to say that I didn't see the need for TB to include in the video the funding for their kickstarter etc it was kind of needless and made him come across as petty imo.As the vast majority were going to agree with his point on censorship.

Ah, yeah, I know what you mean. Personally I think the dev was fair game for such attacks after pulling down the videos (let ye who is without sin etc) but I can understand why people might not like it.

B.A._Baracus

There are multiple sides to this whole thing :pac:

Ultimately the developer shouldnt have taken down the video. As it makes themselves and the game look really bad. Also gives this totalbuscuit great publicity (sure i never heard of his channel until this thread)

But you can see where the developer is coming from. You let someone review your game, you let them make money from your game ... while they tear it to bits? Obviously there are better ways to handle it than what they did.

And from his side, well they gave him a key and permission. But i'd really would love to see the original video. Like does he just say it's a bad game or does he tear it to shreds.

nesf

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

There are multiple sides to this whole thing :pac:

Ultimately the developer shouldnt have taken down the video. As it makes themselves and the game look really bad. Also gives this totalbuscuit great publicity (sure i never heard of his channel until this thread)

But you can see where the developer is coming from. You let someone review your game, you let them make money from your game ... while they tear it to bits? Obviously there are better ways to handle it than what they did.

And from his side, well they gave him a key and permission. But i'd really would love to see the original video. Like does he just say it's a bad game or does he tear it to shreds.

They don't get a handle on it. One of the reason review and criticism is protected generally is so content creators cannot cherrypick reviews that they like.

SeantheMan

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

But i'd really would love to see the original video. Like does he just say it's a bad game or does he tear it to shreds.

The original video is back up, so you can watch and answer your own question

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KjTa_x3rbJE

nesf

Ok, after 7 minutes, please someone tell me this was in alpha.

He's ranting and raving sure but anyone thinking that was worthy of someone paying money for needs their head checked. I don't care how small the studio is or how new they are to game development.

Nody

nesf wrote: »

Ok, after 7 minutes, please someone tell me this was in alpha.

He's ranting and raving sure but anyone thinking that was worthy of someone paying money for needs their head checked. I don't care how small the studio is or how new they are to game development.

That was not even ranting and raving in my book; he kept coming back pointing good things and potential good things but the fact it goes below 30 FPS on a titan graphic card, looks that bad in interfaces, movements etc. and asking money for it? He'd could have gone angry gamer on that and still not be out of line...

ancapailldorcha

Nody wrote: »

That was not even ranting and raving in my book; he kept coming back pointing good things and potential good things but the fact it goes below 30 FPS on a titan graphic card, looks that bad in interfaces, movements etc. and asking money for it? He'd could have gone angry gamer on that and still not be out of line...

I've only seen bits of that video and I did think he genuinely tried to list the positives as well as the negatives. It's been a few weeks since I saw it and I'd forgotten that that was Day One. It's insulting that publishers can release something that's barely beta quality and expect people to pay for it.

wayne040576

Did anyone notice the video settings menu?
Those parameters that he couldn't understand were basically showing the variable names from the code:

bAllowDisplayBlahXY

When I saw that first I assumed it was an alpha build then he said later it was the release??. So nobody went through the main menu screens to find issues like these.

uncle_sam_ie

nesf wrote: »

Ok, after 7 minutes, please someone tell me this was in alpha.

He's ranting and raving sure but anyone thinking that was worthy of someone paying money for needs their head checked. I don't care how small the studio is or how new they are to game development.

He really rips into it at the end, watch it from 17:00.

Jonny7

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

But you can see where the developer is coming from. You let someone review your game, you let them make money from your game ... while they tear it to bits?

Yes, it's a review

Kur4mA

Eh, WHAT?

Seriously this has to be an early alpha release... or the developers idea of a joke. This is genuinely mind boggling. The fact that they are trying to get people to pay for that **** is enough to completely slate them imo. He genuinely tried to look at potential positives for this game and obviously pointed out its flaws. That's the point of a review, and it's his job! You can take TotalBiscuit or leave him but leave personal opinions of him out of this.

Nollog

I laughed at him being on his soapbox and trying to make it a bigger deal than it is, but I do agree with him.

nesf

uncle_sam_ie wrote: »

He really rips into it at the end, watch it from 17:00.

From what was going on on screen and that this was the release version...

Justified. If be filmed himself bitchslapping the dev team one by one it'd be justified. And probably good tv too.

nesf

/\/ollog wrote: »

I laughed at him being on his soapbox and trying to make it a bigger deal than it is, but I do agree with him.

When he was born they thought it was twins, turns out it was just his soapbox.

Sierra Oscar

The developers handling of customer complaints has been a disaster, I know Valve are not happy. Would not surprise me if the game is pulled from Steam.

B.A._Baracus

nesf wrote: »

They don't get a handle on it. One of the reason review and criticism is protected generally is so content creators cannot cherrypick reviews that they like.

Oh I know the deal, and it would be wrong if, as totalbuscuit says, we lived in a world were only positive reviews were 'allowed' - it would be messed up. The developer shouldn't have taken down the video. It's a PR meltdown for them.

nesf

For those who think TB was being a bit mean spirited: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation/8298-Beyond-Two-Souls (NSFW - for some people)

Overheal

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

The developers handling of customer complaints has been a disaster, I know Valve are not happy. Would not surprise me if the game is pulled from Steam.

I considered emailing big G and winding up in his inbox of infinite peril but looking at the greenlight guidelines they didn't breach any agreement or even stated ethos about promoting their greenlight project (eg. keys for votes).

Now I think that clearly thats resulted in dilluted quality entering the system, but its not enough to warrant by itself pulling the IP.

Greenlight similarly needs to be matched by some sort of officiated Quality Control system, kind of like the Nintendo Seal.

Reekwind

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

But you can see where the developer is coming from. You let someone review your game, you let them make money from your game ... while they tear it to bits? Obviously there are better ways to handle it than what they did.

That's how reviews work. You provide the reviewer with your game and they publish a review on the internet or in a magazine. For profit

ancapailldorcha

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

The developers handling of customer complaints has been a disaster, I know Valve are not happy. Would not surprise me if the game is pulled from Steam.

By the looks of things, Valve are content to allow any sort of tat on their service as long as it's profitable.

Kirby

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

By the looks of things, Valve are content to allow any sort of tat on their service as long as it's profitable.

TheWarZ aka infestation survivor stories would prove your statement a little inaccurate. That was taken down fairly quickly.

degrassinoel

Kirby wrote: »

TheWarZ aka infestation survivor stories would prove your statement a little inaccurate. That was taken down fairly quickly.

And it was sneakily renamed when it was put back up again, though i was glad to see steam actually do something about that travesty of a game.

Kirby

degrassinoel wrote: »

And it was sneakily renamed when it was put back up again, though i was glad to see steam actually do something about that travesty of a game.

While that turned out to be a great move with regards to marketing as a lot of people were fooled into buying that crap.....the name change was more to do with not wanting to fight a great big lawsuit from Brad Pitt and his buddies over the similarity between the name of the game, and the name of their billion dollar movie "World War Z".

ancapailldorcha

Kirby wrote: »

While that turned out to be a great move with regards to marketing as a lot of people were fooled into buying that crap.....the name change was more to do with not wanting to fight a great big lawsuit from Brad Pitt and his buddies over the similarity between the name of the game, and the name of their billion dollar movie "World War Z".

I'd heard about that but it was so long ago, I'd forgotten all about it. There's always going to be bad games the same way there'll always be bad films and novels but the likes of WarZ and Day One are just tat that's been hastily put together for a quick buck and it's a shame that Valve are enabling this. I'm sure every developer would love to be able to make games like Bioshock, Mass Effect, Dark Souls, etc but not everyone has the imagination, skill or resources to do that. Trash like Day One and WarZ have no business being sold on the same platform as legitimate games.